Multilingual Retrieval-Augmented Generation (mRAG) systems often exhibit a perceived preference for high-resource languages, particularly English, resulting in the widespread adoption of English pivoting. While prior studies attribute this advantage to the superior English-centric capabilities of Large Language Models (LLMs), we find that such measurements are significantly distorted by structural priors inherent in evaluation benchmarks. Specifically, we identify exposure bias and a gold availability prior—both driven by the disproportionate concentration of resources in English—as well as cultural priors rooted in topic locality, as factors that hinder accurate assessment of genuine language preference. To address these biases, we propose DeLP (Debiased Language Preference), a calibrated metric designed to explicitly factor out these structural confounds. Our analysis using DeLP reveals that the previously reported English preference is largely a byproduct of evidence distribution rather than an inherent model bias. Instead, we find that retrievers fundamentally favor monolingual alignment between the query and the document language. Building on this insight, we introduce DELTA (DEbiased Language preference–guided Text Augmentation), a lightweight and efficient mRAG framework that strategically leverages monolingual alignment to optimize cross-lingual retrieval and generation. Experimental results demonstrate that DELTA consistently outperforms English pivoting and mRAG baselines across diverse languages.

Real-world multi-hop QA is naturally linked with ambiguity, where a single query can trigger multiple reasoning paths that require independent resolution. Since ambiguity can occur at any stage, models must navigate layered uncertainty throughout the entire reasoning chain. Despite its prevalence in real-world user queries, previous benchmarks have primarily focused on single-hop ambiguity, leaving the complex interaction between multi-step inference and layered ambiguity underexplored. In this paper, we introduce MARCH, a benchmark for their intersection, with 2,209 multi-hop ambiguous questions curated via multi-LLM verification and validated by human annotation with strong agreement. Our experiments reveal that even state-of-the-art models struggle with MARCH, confirming that combining ambiguity resolution with multi-step reasoning is a significant challenge. To address this, we propose CLARION, a two-stage agentic framework that explicitly decouples ambiguity planning from evidence-driven reasoning, significantly outperforms existing approaches, and paves the way for robust reasoning systems.

Multilingual Retrieval-Augmented Generation (mRAG) systems enhance language models by integrating external multilingual information to produce context-aware responses. However, mRAG systems struggle with retrieving relevant information due to linguistic variations between queries and documents, generating inconsistent responses when multilingual sources conflict. In this work, we systematically investigate language preferences in both retrieval and generation of mRAG through a series of experiments. Our analysis indicates that retrievers tend to prefer high-resource and query languages, yet this preference does not consistently improve generation performance. Moreover, we observe that generators prefer the query language or Latin scripts, leading to inconsistent outputs. To overcome these issues, we propose Dual Knowledge Multilingual RAG (DKM-RAG), a simple yet effective framework that fuses translated multilingual passages with complementary model knowledge. Empirical results demonstrate that DKM-RAG mitigates language preference in generation and enhances performance across diverse linguistic settings. Code is available at https://github.com/jeonghyunpark2002/LanguagePreference.git